Society/Culture Woke. Can you tell real from parody?

Remove this Banner Ad

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
45,188
40,942
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Not an attack, I'd just like to hear new opinions that I don't currently understand.


1. Is woke a bad thing?
2. What do you mean by "pro-woke"? Does it mean that 'large corps are pretending to be progressive', or is woke a new term for progressive?
3. Identitarian scale. What do you mean by this. It's not a term I'm used to, and Wiki talks about Identitarian, basically, as far right/extremist views. But I don't think that's what you mean.
being woke means you are an identitarian. rather then accepting traditional left wing orthodoxy that race, sex, sexual preferences are not important to your identity, identitarians instead embrace the opposite idea. They believe sex, gender and race is very important to your identity. Identitarians believe only certain races should perform certain cultural rituals (they developed the concept of cultural appropriation as a bad thing). identitarians believe racism is something only white people can do. differences in preferences between sexes are all social constructs created by men rather then a function of biological differences. Without those constructs girls and boys would prefer to play with trucks and wear sparkly bling equally as much is their view. Gender is not determined by body parts but is instead determined by feelings (As to what those feelings are i dont think anyone can describe).
 
Last edited:

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
14,409
12,784
AFL Club
St Kilda
being woke means you are an identitarian. rather then accepting traditional left wing orthodoxy that race, sex, sexual preferences are not important to your identity, identitarians instead embrace the opposite idea. They believe sex, gender and race is very important to your identity. Identitarians believe only certain races should perform certain cultural rituals (they developed the concept of cultural appropriation as a bad thing). identitarians believe racism is something only white people can do. differences in sexual preferences are all social constructs created by men rather then a function of biological differences. Gender is not determined by body parts but is instead determined by feelings (As to whst those feelings are i dont think anyone can describe).
I disagree.

I'm 'woke', and I believe it's a good thing.
I don't accept or support the people who are behind bastardising the term.

I don't think woke means anything that you've stated. I think you've given a mix of extremist positions, and anti-'left' rhetoric.


Identitarian movements seem to be about far-right, racist, bigotry.


Identitarians seem to suggests that a persons race determines all aspects about them. And moving to enforce superiority over what they consider inferior.
That's very different to the 'woke movement' saying that discrimination against race/women/elderly et al, is a bad thing.
 

Crankyhawk

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2007
20,995
15,688
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I disagree.

I'm 'woke', and I believe it's a good thing.
I don't accept or support the people who are behind bastardising the term.

I don't think woke means anything that you've stated. I think you've given a mix of extremist positions, and anti-'left' rhetoric.


Identitarian movements seem to be about far-right, racist, bigotry.


Identitarians seem to suggests that a persons race determines all aspects about them. And moving to enforce superiority over what they consider inferior.
That's very different to the 'woke movement' saying that discrimination against race/women/elderly et al, is a bad thing.
I think your definition of woke movement is not the same as seeds definition or view of what woke is. What you describe sounds more general “progressive viewpoint” while I interpret (perhaps incorrectly) that woke has a more aggressive view and tends to assume something is offensive on behalf of people who may not see an issue.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
45,188
40,942
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
I disagree.

I'm 'woke', and I believe it's a good thing.
I don't accept or support the people who are behind bastardising the term.

I don't think woke means anything that you've stated. I think you've given a mix of extremist positions, and anti-'left' rhetoric.


Identitarian movements seem to be about far-right, racist, bigotry.


Identitarians seem to suggests that a persons race determines all aspects about them. And moving to enforce superiority over what they consider inferior.
That's very different to the 'woke movement' saying that discrimination against race/women/elderly et al, is a bad thing.
To be fair there is no official definition of woke. As with any term really. No one can truly be right or wrong in defining the meaning of words. the term woke was used to describe identitarian academic views originally as woke views. But others such as yourself have simply taken the word as a badge to describe a much broader set of progresive social views. some not to bright right wingers have also taken it to describe anyone left of trump On social issues.

and i agree the people who i describe are anti left? they seem more like 1930 right wingers to me. But they have strong influence in left wing political parties and seem to have the dominant view in left wing circles today. Not just extremist circles.

do you believe cultural appropriation is a bad thing?

do you believe race or sex should be considered in job applications rather then just individual merit?

do you believe indiginous people today on average, that are the same age as you, have more attachment to the australian land then anyone else who was born here and lived here their entire lives?

do you think gender is something you feel and choose for yourself rather then something you are physically born? And yes im aware some people have physical attributes of both genders. Thats a different issue.

do you believe its ok for islam groups to restrict human rights to their women because its simply part of their culture? I.e. do you believe in moral relativism rather than universal moral values that should apply to all? To put it more simply. Do you not believe in universal human rights?

if you have answered yes to any of these questions then you are displaying identitarian views that are not traditional left wing views. And in many ways are the opposite of the traditional progessive movement.
 
Last edited:

Crankyhawk

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2007
20,995
15,688
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
To be fair there is no official definition of woke. As with any term really. No one can truly be right or wrong in defining the meaning of words. the term woke was used to describe identitarian academic views originally as woke views. But others such as yourself have simply taken the word as a badge to describe a much broader set of progresive social views. some not to bright right wingers have also taken it to describe anyone left of trump On social issues.

and i agree the people who i describe are anti left? they seem more like 1930 right wingers to me. But they have strong influence in left wing political parties and seem to have the dominant view in left wing circles today. Not just extremist circles.

do you believe cultural appropriation is a bad thing?

do you believe race or sex should be considered in job applications rather then just individual merit?

do you believe indiginous people today on average, that are the same age as you, have more attachment to the australian land then anyone else who was born here and lived here their entire lives?

do you think gender is something you feel and choose for yourself rather then something you are physically born? And yes im aware some people have physical attributes of both genders. Thats a different issue.

do you believe its ok for islam groups to restrict human rights to their women that we beleive should apply in australia because its simply part of their culture? I.e. do you believe in moral relativism rather than universal moral values that should apply to all? To put it more simply. Do you not believe in universal human rights?

if you have answered yes to any of these questions then you are displaying identitarian views that are not traditional left wing views. And in many ways are the opposite of the traditional progessive movement.

The 2nd question you pose is more nuanced. There can be benefit to a workplace by having a diversity of views, values and cultures involved. Obviously not to the point where it completely overrides merit, but in situations where the merit argument is very close I don't have a huge issue with it

i'm pretty much a solid no on the rest of the questions
 

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
14,409
12,784
AFL Club
St Kilda
To be fair there is no official definition of woke. As with any term really. No one can truly be right or wrong in defining the meaning of words. the term woke was used to describe identitarian academic views originally as woke views. But others such as yourself have simply taken the word as a badge to describe a much broader set of progresive social views. some not to bright right wingers have also taken it to describe anyone left of trump On social issues.
To me, 'woke' is just the latest term for 'progressive', being twisted and turned into an insult.
Leftist, politically correct, social justice, feminist, etc.

woke adjective​
chiefly US slang​
: aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)​

The reason for this is so it can connect extremists with progressives, in order to delegitimise all the views and positions held by progressives.
Progressives adopt a new name, it's bastardised, it's turned into an insult, rinse and repeat.


and i agree the people who i describe are anti left? they seem more like 1930 right wingers to me. But they have strong influence in left wing political parties and seem to have the dominant view in left wing circles today. Not just extremist circles.
I don't agree with that. I view society as having shifted more to the 'right'.

do you believe cultural appropriation is a bad thing?
I think there are some situations where cultural appropriation is a bad thing.
I also think most people don't really understand it, and that the majority of claims of cultural appropriation are incorrect.

do you believe race or sex should be considered in job applications rather then just individual merit?
No. But I'm aware that it has and does happen, so I support things like 'affirmative action' and quotas, until it's so normalised that people are judged just on individual merit.

do you believe indiginous people today on average, that are the same age as you, have more attachment to the australian land then anyone else who was born here and lived here their entire lives?
I think it depends on upbringing, awareness and understanding.
I think I've got more connection to the Australian land than some of the Indigenous people I know. But I think that the average Indigenous person will have more of an attachment to the Australian land.

do you think gender is something you feel and choose for yourself rather then something you are physically born? And yes im aware some people have physical attributes of both genders. Thats a different issue.
I think sex and gender are different things.
I think there are some aspects to gender that grew from our natural biology. But that it's possible to be born as a male, but feel you're a woman.
do you believe its ok for islam groups to restrict human rights to their women that we beleive should apply in australia because its simply part of their culture? I.e. do you believe in moral relativism rather than universal moral values that should apply to all? To put it more simply. Do you not believe in universal human rights?
No I don't believe it's ok.

if you have answered yes to any of these questions then you are displaying identitarian views that are not traditional left wing views. And in many ways are the opposite of the traditional progessive movement.
I think you're applying the "leftists are the most racist, because they're the ones always talking about race" view.

Is your position that we already have equality, so the real racism/sexism is the people who talk about it?
Do you believe that 'woke' people are arguing for equality of outcome, rather than equality of opportunity?
 

Gough

Moderator
Sep 29, 2006
59,204
106,736
AFL Club
Hawthorn
To be fair there is no official definition of woke. As with any term really. No one can truly be right or wrong in defining the meaning of words. the term woke was used to describe identitarian academic views originally as woke views. But others such as yourself have simply taken the word as a badge to describe a much broader set of progresive social views. some not to bright right wingers have also taken it to describe anyone left of trump On social issues.

and i agree the people who i describe are anti left? they seem more like 1930 right wingers to me. But they have strong influence in left wing political parties and seem to have the dominant view in left wing circles today. Not just extremist circles.

do you believe cultural appropriation is a bad thing?

do you believe race or sex should be considered in job applications rather then just individual merit?

do you believe indiginous people today on average, that are the same age as you, have more attachment to the australian land then anyone else who was born here and lived here their entire lives?

do you think gender is something you feel and choose for yourself rather then something you are physically born? And yes im aware some people have physical attributes of both genders. Thats a different issue.

do you believe its ok for islam groups to restrict human rights to their women that we beleive should apply in australia because its simply part of their culture? I.e. do you believe in moral relativism rather than universal moral values that should apply to all? To put it more simply. Do you not believe in universal human rights?

if you have answered yes to any of these questions then you are displaying identitarian views that are not traditional left wing views. And in many ways are the opposite of the traditional progessive movement.
Woke is anything you don't like and using it is just virtue signalling to your idiot mates that you're not very bright either. A couple of years ago you would have been accusing everyone of being a social justice warriors but that seems to have faded from fashion among your mob. Maybe we should open a book on the next word or phrase that you guys will adopt as a pejorative to describe things you don't understand.
 

Ghost Patrol

Vice President of Antifa (not PRGuy)
Sep 17, 2019
13,060
21,834
AFL Club
Richmond
To be fair there is no official definition of woke. As with any term really. No one can truly be right or wrong in defining the meaning of words. the term woke was used to describe identitarian academic views originally as woke views. But others such as yourself have simply taken the word as a badge to describe a much broader set of progresive social views. some not to bright right wingers have also taken it to describe anyone left of trump On social issues.

and i agree the people who i describe are anti left? they seem more like 1930 right wingers to me. But they have strong influence in left wing political parties and seem to have the dominant view in left wing circles today. Not just extremist circles.

do you believe cultural appropriation is a bad thing?

do you believe race or sex should be considered in job applications rather then just individual merit?

do you believe indiginous people today on average, that are the same age as you, have more attachment to the australian land then anyone else who was born here and lived here their entire lives?

do you think gender is something you feel and choose for yourself rather then something you are physically born? And yes im aware some people have physical attributes of both genders. Thats a different issue.

do you believe its ok for islam groups to restrict human rights to their women because its simply part of their culture? I.e. do you believe in moral relativism rather than universal moral values that should apply to all? To put it more simply. Do you not believe in universal human rights?

if you have answered yes to any of these questions then you are displaying identitarian views that are not traditional left wing views. And in many ways are the opposite of the traditional progessive movement.

Seeds is the Joe Hildebrand cover band.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
45,188
40,942
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
The 2nd question you pose is more nuanced. There can be benefit to a workplace by having a diversity of views, values and cultures involved. Obviously not to the point where it completely overrides merit, but in situations where the merit argument is very close I don't have a huge issue with it

i'm pretty much a solid no on the rest of the questions
I agree To a point. There are circumstances where positive discrimination are valid. Temporarily. But its not about equalising the sex and race composition of each workplace as identitarians tend to argue.

i do believe, however, that maternity leave laws need to be changed to remove incentives for employers to discriminate against female hiring. I also believe flexible working arrangements need to be better utilised and universal free childcare and after school care introduced to incentivise females with children to not only be able to stay in the workforce but not have career progression interupted by children.
 
Last edited:

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
45,188
40,942
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Woke is anything you don't like and using it is just virtue signalling to your idiot mates that you're not very bright either. A couple of years ago you would have been accusing everyone of being a social justice warriors but that seems to have faded from fashion among your mob. Maybe we should open a book on the next word or phrase that you guys will adopt as a pejorative to describe things you don't understand.
No its not just anything people hate. Ive just described what it was originally and objectively. Literally in the post you quoted. Do you even rationally interpret what you read and quote or just let the emotion of it run over you when you respond?

Another poster then described it As a badge of honour that they wear. so not a label for something they hate either.

and what group of guys are you talking about? Can you stop thinking about politics like a competition between two football sides? Please just stop it. its not very bright. think for yourself.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
45,188
40,942
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
To me, 'woke' is just the latest term for 'progressive', being twisted and turned into an insult.
Leftist, politically correct, social justice, feminist, etc.

woke adjective​
chiefly US slang​
: aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)​

The reason for this is so it can connect extremists with progressives, in order to delegitimise all the views and positions held by progressives.
Progressives adopt a new name, it's bastardised, it's turned into an insult, rinse and repeat.



I don't agree with that. I view society as having shifted more to the 'right'.


I think there are some situations where cultural appropriation is a bad thing.
I also think most people don't really understand it, and that the majority of claims of cultural appropriation are incorrect.


No. But I'm aware that it has and does happen, so I support things like 'affirmative action' and quotas, until it's so normalised that people are judged just on individual merit.


I think it depends on upbringing, awareness and understanding.
I think I've got more connection to the Australian land than some of the Indigenous people I know. But I think that the average Indigenous person will have more of an attachment to the Australian land.


I think sex and gender are different things.
I think there are some aspects to gender that grew from our natural biology. But that it's possible to be born as a male, but feel you're a woman.

No I don't believe it's ok.


I think you're applying the "leftists are the most racist, because they're the ones always talking about race" view.

Is your position that we already have equality, so the real racism/sexism is the people who talk about it?
Do you believe that 'woke' people are arguing for equality of outcome, rather than equality of opportunity?
thanks for well thought out responses.

i disagree with some of them but i can tell you atleast addressed the questions raised with reason.

ps. I view myself as a leftist. Especially on social issues. Always have. But i disagree strongly with with I define as woke social views. They are in many ways the opposite of my own beliefs. If you simplify all social views as either woke/progressive or conservative then you cant see the very significant diversion in opinion that is happening within the left/progressive movement. you can call woke what you like. But then you need a different label to describe the significantly different views within the left movement.

i believe the core part of our identity should be based on values, achievements and beliefs. We should aim to be colour blind in regards to what matters. There is a core part of the left movement that now disagrees with this. they believe a signficant part of identity is a function of race, gender, sexual choice and the culture of your ancestors.

i believe in universal human rights. There is a core part of the left movement that disagrees with this. Rights are instead a function of culture.

i believe we should embrace the good parts of all cultures. it makes us a stronger and more educated society. And if we embrace it then it now makes it a part of our own culture. Culture is not a function of race. Its a function of participation. There is a core part of the left movement that disagrees with this.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
14,409
12,784
AFL Club
St Kilda
thanks for well thought out responses.

i disagree with some of them but i can tell you atleast addressed the questions raised with reason.

ps. I view myself as a leftist. Especially on social issues. Always have. But i disagree strongly with with I define as woke social views. They are in many ways the opposite of my own beliefs. If you simplify all social views as either woke/progressive or conservative then you cant see the very significant diversion in opinion that is happening within the left/progressive movement. you can call woke what you like. But then you need a different label to describe the significantly different views within the left movement.

i believe the core part of our identity should be based on values, achievements and beliefs. We should aim to be colour blind in regards to what matters. There is a core part of the left movement that now disagrees with this. they believe a signficant part of identity is a function of race, gender, sexual choice and the culture of your ancestors.

i believe in universal human rights. There is a core part of the left movement that disagrees with this. Rights are instead a function of culture.

i believe we should embrace the good parts of all cultures. it makes us a stronger and more educated society. And if we embrace it then it now makes it a part of our own culture. Culture is not a function of race. Its a function of participation. There is a core part of the left movement that disagrees with this.


Can you give a specific example, so I can better understand where our views diverge?





Actual cultural appropriation doesn't create a more inclusive society. It maintains or widens the gap because it treats it as a novelty, as something distinctly different. It's used specifically because it stands out.
It does the opposite of normalisation.
The Cleveland Indians. With Chief Wahoo.
1639804316861.png


The Washington Redskins.
1639804663625.png



It's been bastardised by the 'left' and the 'right'. And it's not understood.
A white person cooking an Indonesian meal, isn't cultural appropriation.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
45,188
40,942
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Can you give a specific example, so I can better understand where our views diverge?





Actual cultural appropriation doesn't create a more inclusive society. It maintains or widens the gap because it treats it as a novelty, as something distinctly different. It's used specifically because it stands out.
It does the opposite of normalisation.
The Cleveland Indians. With Chief Wahoo.
View attachment 1299319

The Washington Redskins.
View attachment 1299323


It's been bastardised by the 'left' and the 'right'. And it's not understood.
A white person cooking an Indonesian meal, isn't cultural appropriation.
Those examples are kind of dehumanising because they are using people in places where we would normally use animals. Its not really appropriating culture but more mocking or dehumanizing a culture. Appropriating culture is participating in the act of a culture Without consent. Not making a drawing of it and then using it as a mascot.

see description in the following link:


here culture appropriation is labelled a bad thing because consent should be required from people with certain bloodlines in order to participate. and this need for consent is something i strongly disagree with. You shouldnt need consent to play a digeridoo or dress up as mulan (who do you even get consent from?) or listen to rap music. Culture shouldnt be restricted by blood. It shouldnt be owned by blood. It should be about participation that is free to all. And people need to feel like the culuture can become their own and not made to feel that they are an inferior participant cos they have the wrong bloodlines. This desire to link culture to a blood hierarchy makes me feel a bit sick to be honest.
 

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
14,409
12,784
AFL Club
St Kilda
Those examples are kind of dehumanising because they are using people in places where we would normally use animals. Its not really appropriating culture but more mocking or dehumanizing a culture. Appropriating culture is participating in the act of a culture Without consent. Not making a drawing of it and then using it as a mascot.

see description in the following link:


here culture appropriation is labelled a bad thing because consent should be required from people with certain bloodlines in order to participate. and this need for consent is something i strongly disagree with. You shouldnt need consent to play a digeridoo or dress up as mulan (who do you even get consent from?) or listen to rap music. Culture shouldnt be restricted by blood. It shouldnt be owned by blood. It should be about participation that is free to all. And people need to feel like the culuture can become their own and not made to feel that they are an inferior participant cos they have the wrong bloodlines. This desire to link culture to a blood hierarchy makes me feel a bit sick to be honest.
Seeds, you don't seem to be engaging or responding. And it's becoming frustrating.
You're looking for things to support your position, and you're finding them even if they're not there.

The creation you've made, from the link you've shared shows a disconnect. It's like you didn't read the article.
What cultural appropriation isn’t
Cultural exchange is different from cultural appropriation. Things like tea, gunpowder and pasta have been shared between different cultures throughout history. These ‘borrowings’ aren’t the same as cultural appropriation, because they don’t involve power. When different cultures come together on an equal footing, exchange happens. But when dominant groups take from an oppressed group, we’re dealing with appropriation.​
Cultural exchange is also very different from assimilation. ‘Assimilation’ describes what happens when minority cultures are forced to adopt features from a dominant culture in order to fit in. This is different from appropriation, because it’s done to ensure survival and to avoid discrimination.​


This desire to link culture to a blood hierarchy makes me feel a bit sick to be honest.
Can you quote the part of the article, that you made you feel this?
 

sorted

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
12,135
14,608
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oldham, West Ham
i believe the core part of our identity should be based on values, achievements and beliefs. We should aim to be colour blind in regards to what matters. There is a core part of the left movement that now disagrees with this. they believe a signficant part of identity is a function of race, gender, sexual choice and the culture of your ancestors.

i believe in universal human rights. There is a core part of the left movement that disagrees with this. Rights are instead a function of culture.

These values you ascribe to were mainstream until about 20 years ago. Since then we have seen the rise in the view that people can't be seen either as individuals or en masse but as a function of the groups they belong to and how that group sits in the oppression/victim hierarchy. The claim would be that universal human rights should be rejected because it is framed within a Western patriarchal framework of discourse. It's popular in academia and "People and Culture" departments but I reckon it's been a disaster for the left as regards popular appeal. Where does a working class Greek or Italian immigrant bloke sit in this discussion?
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
60,551
66,420
AFL Club
West Coast
Individual vs group identity is the sort of thing that plays an important role in your life if you don't have anything else going on.

Gender for example has become a parody. Once there were just two, then the gates opened and there were a handful and before you knew it there were dozens. The biggest number I've personally seen is 112. Now it's a spectrum with theoretically infinite gender identities, so as a group identity that makes it redundant.

If you endlessly redefine and invent group identities to suit your individual preference/perspective, well I'm sure you can see where I'm going...
 

mr bagcroft

Norm Smith Medallist
May 19, 2017
5,467
6,426
AFL Club
St Kilda
Individual vs group identity is the sort of thing that plays an important role in your life if you don't have anything else going on.
Oh how true, same could ber said for many modern sop called "social issues".
Also up there is the NEED for attention and validation of ones own opnion.
 

sorted

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
12,135
14,608
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oldham, West Ham
Individual vs group identity is the sort of thing that plays an important role in your life if you don't have anything else going on.

Gender for example has become a parody. Once there were just two, then the gates opened and there were a handful and before you knew it there were dozens. The biggest number I've personally seen is 112. Now it's a spectrum with theoretically infinite gender identities, so as a group identity that makes it redundant.

If you endlessly redefine and invent group identities to suit your individual preference/perspective, well I'm sure you can see where I'm going...

Non-cisgender as a distinct, oppressed group seems like a stretch. Is it enabling to define yourself as something you are not? It becomes even less meaningful when you go the other way and fractionate gender into hundreds or theoretically infinite groups. I think this is an example of postmodern deconstructionism without a coherent alternative theory. It's part by academic design and part by happenstance.

Judith Butler talked about "the politics of parody" - a strategy to subvert traditional patterns of gender and sexuality, and render them absurd. It was like she wanted to liberate people from the constraints of traditional roles - but without outlining what might come next, let alone what alternate beliefs might give meaning to people. So in the vacuum of values after the rejection of traditional genders, people make up their own genders - and take it very seriously with all the personal pronoun stuff. I don't think they realise they are part of the process of absurdity.

Going back further, Butler based all her theory on a couple of flawed premises. That biological sex differences in humans were a myth. And heterosexuality was not the default.
 

Soft Downhill Skier

2008-2010 wasn't me.
Sep 21, 2004
42,424
43,349
AFL Club
GWS
These values you ascribe to were mainstream until about 20 years ago. Since then we have seen the rise in the view that people can't be seen either as individuals or en masse but as a function of the groups they belong
Yeah national identity, religious affiliation and the civilised/uncivilised dichotomy never existed; we were a society based on untrammelled individualism prior to this woke stuff.
 

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
14,409
12,784
AFL Club
St Kilda
Any recent poster want to substantiate their position, and stand by it?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad